AI chatbots have been shown to be “unreliable and clearly biased” when providing election recommendations, the Dutch data protection authority (AP) has stated, raising alarms about a possible risk to democracy just eight days before the country’s general election.
Testing Reveals Repeated Partiality in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “frequently recommend identical two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the regulator explained in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the AI recommended either the right-wing PVV of Geert Wilders or the progressive GroenLinks-PvdA led by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Some parties, such as the moderate CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these parties, the study indicated.
Official Warns Against Using AI Chatbots for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the data protection agency, Monique Verdier, stated that while AI assistants appear to be smart resources, “for election guidance, they repeatedly fall short”. Voters were being pushed toward a party that might not correspond to their ideological beliefs, she emphasized.
“This immediately affects a fundamental pillar of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
The Dutch head to the polls on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the performance of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Geert Wilders is ahead in surveys but the lead over the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with numerous electors still undecided.
All major parties have ruled out an alliance with the Freedom party, implying the party that comes second is most likely to supply the future head of government.
Unintentional Bias Attributed to AI Operation
The authority stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “identified shortcomings” are a result of the manner in which AI assistants function.
